III-3 Śrī Bhāshya | Rāmānuja | 4-5

Topic 4 - Specializing the ‘Om’ of the Udgītha Vidyā is apt, as ‘Om’ is common to all the Vedas

Sutra 3,3.9

व्याप्तेश्च समञ्जसम् ॥ ९ ॥

vyāpteśca samañjasam || 9 ||

vyāpteḥ—Because (Om) extends (over the whole of the Vedas); ca—and; samañjasam—is appropriate.

9. And because (Om) extends (over the whole of the Vedas), (to specialize it by the term ‘Udgītha’) is appropriate.

Since the Prāṇava, which is a part of the Udgītha, is introduced as the subject of meditation in the first prapāthaka of the Chāṇḍogya, and extends over the later vidyās also, it is appropriate to assume that also in the clause 'the gods took the Udgītha'--which stands in the middle--the term Udgītha denotes the Prāṇava. Expressions such as 'the cloth is burned' show that frequently the whole denotes the part.--The conclusion from all this is that in the Chāṇḍogya the object of meditation is constituted by the Prāṇava--there termed Udgītha--viewed under the form of Prāṇa; while in the Vājasaneyi the term Udgītha denotes the whole Udgītha, and the object of meditation is he who produces the Udgītha, i.e. the udgātri, viewed under the form of Prāṇa. And this proves that the two vidyās are separate.--Here terminates the Adhikaraṇa of 'difference.'

Topic 5 - Unity of the Prāṇa Vidyā

Sutra 3,3.10

सर्वाभेदादन्यत्रेमे ॥ १० ॥

sarvābhedādanyatreme || 10 ||

sarvābhedāt—On account of non-difference everywhere; anyatra—in the other places; ime—these qualities (are to be inserted).

10. On account of the non-difference (of the Vidyā) everywhere (i.e. in all the texts of the different Śākhās where the Prāṇa Vidyā occurs) these qualities (mentioned in two of them are to be inserted) in the other places (e.g. the Kaushitaki Upanishad).

The Chāṇḍogya and the Vājasaneyi alike record a meditation on Prana; the object of meditation being Prana as possessing the qualities of being the oldest and the best, and also as possessing certain other qualities such as being the richest, and so on (Kh. Up. V, 1; Bri. Up. VI, 1). In the text of the Kaushitaki, on the other hand, there is a meditation on Prāṇa which mentions the former qualities ('being the best' and 'being the oldest'), but not the latter ('being the richest,' and so on). This, the Pūrvapakshin maintains, constitutes a difference between the objects of meditation, and hence between the meditations themselves.--This view the Sūtra sets aside 'on account of non-difference of everything, those elsewhere.' There is no difference of meditation. Those qualities, viz. being the richest, and so on, are to be meditated upon in the other place also, viz. in the meditation on Prāṇa of the Kaushitaki; 'since there is non-difference of everything,' i.e. since the text of the Kaushitaki also exhibits the very same method, in all its details, for proving what it is undertaken to prove, viz. that Prāṇa is the oldest and best. And for that proof it is required that Prāṇa should be viewed as possessing also the quality of being the richest, and so on, and these qualities therefore have to be comprised in the meditation of the Kaushitaki also. Hence there is no difference of meditation.--Here terminates the Adhikaraṇa of 'non- difference of everything.' In the same way as the meditation on Prāṇa as the oldest and best cannot be accomplished without Prāṇa being also meditated upon as the richest, and so on. and as hence these latter qualities have to be comprised in the meditation on Prāṇa of the Kaushitaki, although they are not expressly mentioned there; thus those qualities of Brahman also, without which the meditation on Brahman cannot be accomplished, must be included in all meditations on Brahman--this is the point to be proved next.